linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/5]acpi:glue.c Fix warning: variable 'ret' set but not used

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 01 Jul 2010 06:41:32 -0700
From:	"Justin P. Mattock" <justinmattock@...il.com>
To:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	lenb@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5]acpi:glue.c Fix warning: variable 'ret' set but not
 used

On 07/01/2010 02:31 AM, David Howells wrote:
> Justin P. Mattock<justinmattock@...il.com>  wrote:
>
>> +		if (fn) {
>> +			dev_warn(&acpi_dev->dev,
>> +				"Failed to create firmware_node link to %s %s: %d\n",
>> +				dev_driver_string(dev), dev_name(dev), fn);
>> +		} else if (pn) {
>> +			dev_warn(&acpi_dev->dev,
>> +				"Failed to create physical_node link to %s %s: %d\n",
>> +				dev_driver_string(dev), dev_name(dev), pn);
>> +				return AE_ERROR;
>> +		}			
>
> There's one more question to ask yourself: do you really need two dev_warn()
> statements?  You could have just one that prints both error values:
>
> 		if (fn || pn)
> 			dev_warn(&acpi_dev->dev,
> 				 "Failed to create link(s) to %s %s:"
> 				 " fn=%d pn=%d\n",
> 				 dev_driver_string(dev), dev_name(dev),
> 				 fn, pn);

ah... I did think about that a few days ago, but had no idea how to 
really follow through with this.. and from looking at what you did, it's 
as simple as  a || b

>
> Not sure it's worth going that far.  You could reduce it still further:
>
> 		if (fn || pn)
> 			dev_warn(&acpi_dev->dev,
> 				 "Failed to create link(s) to %s %s:"
> 				 " %d\n",
> 				 dev_driver_string(dev), dev_name(dev),
> 				 fn ?: pn);

I don't mind resending with your change to this.

>
> Is it that important to know which failed to be created, or that both failed
> to be created?
>
> David
>

maybe a simple test(prog) case can be created to simulate what this is 
doing, just to make sure.

Justin P. Mattock
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/